Reply With Quote
Hey Agloco,
Who is that sweet lady in your signature?
To say Manu is better than Tim and Tony is really crazy. You cant be serious.
Tim is a hof, Tony probably will be and Manu, I dont know, maybe.
oooh this is going to be a tony vs manu thread again
Hey Agloco,
Who is that sweet lady in your signature?
Petrovic was inducted in 2002.
Manu's a 100% lock to get in the HOF, just like Tim. Right now TP isn't close to being there yet.
I think Manu is a Hall of Famer definitely. With just his NBA resume, he doesn't really have a shot. Like someone said earlier, he made one All-Star team and one third team All-NBA... so that wouldn't have been enough without his international accolades.
Tony -- He has to have probably 3 more All-Star level seasons to have a chance.
And
just wait and seeTo say Manu is better than Tim and Tony is really crazy. You cant be serious.
Tim is a hof, Tony probably will be and Manu, I dont know, maybe.
oooh this is going to be a tony vs manu thread again
He could have retired after the 05 championship and still be HoF.
besides, you cant compare manu with divac or kukoc. especially not Divac. come on.
I say it's right on pace without the Olympic Gold, arguably better.
Personally, the international resumes of Ginobili and Kukoc is pretty much a wash. Ginobili's gold medal in 2004 sticks out as the major distinction. However, I could argue that one of Kukoc's Olympic silvers came the Olympic year of the first Dream Team in 1992, while Ginobili's gold was won in an Olympic year the United States sent its weakest team of professionals, and arguably third tier stars (aside from Duncan and AI of course) compared to their other Olympic teams.
And I do think Kukoc has a more impressive "individual" international career. The 9 player of the year awards (Mister Euro POY and Euroscar POY) really stand out. I don't know what the equivalent would be for South American players or if there is one, but those awards are impressive nonetheless for Kukoc.
Ginobili's NBA career is better than Kukoc's. Neither is HOF worthy by themselves. There is no perfect comparison for Ginobili, but I think Kukoc is a much better analogy than say Kevin McHale or James Worthy, or internationally Vlade Divac or Tony Parker. Both Ginobili and Kukoc have seemingly unparalleled success at the Euroleague and international level and both were key components to 3 NBA championship teams. It's easy to argue that Ginobili had been more integral to the Spurs' les than Kukoc. But then again, I don't believe HOF voters will necessarily take into account that Ginobili "almost won the 2005 NBA Finals MVP." Kukoc actually has pretty similar NBA Finals stats to Ginobili. Ginobili's are better, but not significantly.
Perhaps Spurs and Ginobili fans should hope Toni Kukoc gets some serious consideration for the HOF in upcoming years.
Why not Kukoc?
lmao what u know bout that abn z-ro & trae no help should be manus theme song
that right there shows the type of player Manu is ladies and gentlemen
i just wanna mother ing win
IMO, TD > Manu > TP
The 3 will be HOF
If Kukoc is inducted that would be a clear sign that Manu goes in when eligible.
These HOF discussions are always interesting because there are no established standards for induction and the membership and the criteria of the selection committees changes from year to year.
For example, there are two Croats and a Serb already in the HOF, while there are no South American male players. Should that make a difference for Divac, Kukoc, and Manu? Could it?
Its kind of crazy that someone would think Manu is better than Tim. Tim is a franchise player. One of the best all time w/out any question.
Not that Manu isn't great. He is. Especially is international play. He's been one of the best NBA's 6th Man since he took on that role. He'd probably have better stats if it weren't for his injuries, but the truth is that his injuries have hurt his NBA stats. I'm sure that doesn't matter to him. He's a winner. Big time winner. He's got a lot of heart when he plays and that is why I love that dude.
Tony is not a for sure HOFamer. He has three championships, a Finals MVP, and a couple of All Star appearances. He needs a few more seasons like he had in 2008-2009 to be a for sure Hall of Famer. His international career is not good as Manu. So that isn't gonna help him in.
Is Manu better than Tony? I don't know and don't really care. They're asked to do different things. At times Manu has carried the team like he is doing now. Then there were times when Tony has carried the team like he did last year. Its an argument that can go either way. I'm just happy they both play for the Spurs right now and have helped bring three NBA les to our city.
the combination of what he has done in the nba and internationally has to make him a hall of famer. Its the basketball hall of fame correct? not the nba hall of fame?
He should. he has won mutiple championships, and has done great internationaly.
Well, for me the croatian sensation, is more impressive. Also as a player and his international career. his european career. Plus I also look at how tougher it was for the first international players in the nba. He was great, as a shooter his vision, best 6th man. I don't like comparisons though. But, I was more pointing out to Divac.
I wonder what Kukoc does now. His son, marin committed to Penn.
Yo Jam... are you seriously saying Scola, Delfino, Hermann, Oberto, Sanchez, Wolkowiski are > Odom, LeBron, Wade, Amare, Marion, Jefferson?
Sorry but I couldn't resist...
Kukoc doesn't deserve to be named on the same sentence with Manu Ginobili... he has no business there.... NONE
Oscar Schmidt?
Scored nearly 50,000 points but not in the HOF.
Lol good one.
I actually think Vlade has a better chance at the HOF than Kukoc, but in a similar fashion as Drazen Petrovic was inducted, and that is go in as a player, but probably it having more to do with him as a contributor. Vlade is really one of the true forefathers of international NBA players, even more so than Marciulionis. As an ambassador and pioneer of Yugoslavian/Serbian basketball, Vlade deserves to go in as much as any international player.
I bring up Kukoc simply because most people who believe Manu is a HOFer say so because of his international resume. Now whether you believe Manu is better than Kukoc or Kukoc is better than Manu or they're similarly good, Kukoc's international resume is as impressive and arguably more impressive than Manu's. If you think Kukoc's career falls short of the HOF, then I personally think the same would be said of Manu's career.
I couldnt resist either
So, I understand that you prefer manu more than kukoc, of course, but to say he should not deserve to be named in the same sentence with manu is over the top.
Last edited by Bukefal; 03-17-2010 at 01:08 PM.
Damn, I always just assumed . . .
Manu's a lock. He'd be in my starting 5 top international players of all time!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
